Automated access control apparatus and methods are known in the art and include both remote user control as well as more autonomous control functionality and capability. Movable barrier operators (such as, but not limited to, garage door openers, pivoting and sliding gate operators, pivoting guard arm operators, rolling shutter operators, and so forth), for example, are a nearly ubiquitous example of such access control mechanisms.
Increased automation and functional autonomy represents a desired design goal. Many users, for example, generally wish for barriers in their path to open and close in a timely and convenient manner with little or no effort or even conscious regard on their part. Security and environmental concerns, of course, often blunt such design aspirations. Cost, too, frequently figures as a sobering counterpoint to fielding such capabilities. Nevertheless, as a general principle, increased automation remains an important and viable design requirement in many instances.
One simple prior art example in this regard comprises a garage door opener that offers a delayed closure button in addition to a more traditional immediate closure button. When asserted by a user, the delayed closure button initiates a non-adjustable 30 second timer. At the conclusion of that period of time, the corresponding garage door will automatically close. This presumes that the provided window time will be sufficient to permit, for example, a pedestrian or vehicle located within the garage to withdraw from the garage prior to the garage door closing in this manner. Should this prove untrue in a given instance, contact between the closing garage door and an obstacle such as a vehicle caught in the path of the closing barrier is sensed in a usual fashion and movement of the barrier is stopped and/or reversed.
There are numerous problems with such an approach. For example, the pre-set period of time may be insufficient in many instances. As a result, the garage door may close prior to the person (or persons) or vehicle having removed themselves from the garage. This, in turn, can force the user to issue another instruction to cause the door to open (presuming that the garage door has not, in fact, made contact with a vehicle or exiting person while closing and reversed its motion). The pre-set period of time could be modified to provide a longer period of time, but this raises other issues. For example, a five minute delay may provide a window of opportunity that will likely accommodate a timely exit by vehicles or persons, but also may present an unacceptable window of vulnerability to unauthorized entry by others.
Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. Also, common but well-understood elements that are useful or necessary in a commercially feasible embodiment are often not depicted in order to facilitate a less obstructed view of these various embodiments of the present invention. It will also be understood that the terms and expressions used herein have the ordinary meaning as is usually accorded to such terms and expressions by those skilled in the corresponding respective areas of inquiry and study except where other specific meanings have otherwise been set forth herein.